Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Gallion, 368 U.S. 16 (1961). · Go Syfert
Nat'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Gallion, 368 U.S. 16 (1961). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Theater Corp. v. Murphy (ca2, 1974-05-17)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Theater Corp. v. Murphy
2d Cir. · 1974 · signal: see · confidence high
See NAACP v. Gallion, 368 U.S. 16 , 82 S.Ct. 4 , 7 L.Ed.2d 85 (1961). 9 On July 20, 1973, nine days after Judge Lasker entered the order granting the preliminary injunction against enforcement of article 1, the New York City Criminal Court handed down a decision in certain consolidated prosecutions previously brought for violations of article 1.
cited Cited "see" 414 Theater Corp. v. Murphy
2d Cir. · 1974 · signal: see · confidence high
See NAACP v. Gallion, 368 U.S. 16 , 82 S.Ct. 4 , 7 L.Ed.2d 85 (1961).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE
v.
GALLION, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ALABAMA, Et Al.
303.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 23, 1961.
368 U.S. 16
Robert L. Carter, Fred D. Cray, Arthur D. Shores, Orzell Billingsley, Jr. and Peter Hall for petitioner., MacDonald Qallion, Attorney General of Alabama, and Willard W. Livingston, Leslie Hall and Cordon Madison, Assistant Attorneys General, for respondents.
Stewart.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published
Per Curiam.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment below is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with instructions to direct the District Court to proceed with the trial of the issues in this action unless within a reasonable time, no later than January 2, 1962, the State of Alabama shall have accorded to petitioner an opportunity to be heard on its motion to dissolve the state restraining order of June 1, 1956, and upon the merits of the action in which such order was issued. Pending the final determination of all proceedings in the state action, the District Court is authorized to retain jurisdiction over the federal action and to take[*17] such steps as may appear necessary and appropriate to assure a prompt disposition of all issues involved in, or connected with, the state action. Truax v. Corrigan, 257 U. S. 312, 331-334.

Mr. Justice Stewart took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.